Ah yes.. nostalgia isn’t what it used to be.
Let’s face it, some of those old cartoons were rubbish. Poor animation and non-stories. Why not update them and make them more relevant to todays kids?
Also the 2005 remake of Captain Scarlet was brilliant. It even had the BBMF Lancaster in one episode.
Ah yes.. nostalgia isn’t what it used to be.
Let’s face it, some of those old cartoons were rubbish. Poor animation and non-stories. Why not update them and make them more relevant to todays kids?
Also the 2005 remake of Captain Scarlet was brilliant. It even had the BBMF Lancaster in one episode.
That is sad news. I had the pleasure of flying with John a couple of times in the mid 90s.
Also worth pointing this out as well.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/2053900/eu-court-holds-news-website-liable-for-readers-comments.html
I would imagine this holds for forum comments as well. Past history on this forum would suggest that anything that may be misconstrued from a legal point of view should be removed.
Definitely a personal view since I cannot remember the last time I watched anything on ITV; possibly the odd nostalgia prog on ITV3 (or whatever its called) but there has been nothing for several years that has made me feel the need to watch or record it. Actually, Channel 4 has gone downhill too.
That’s certainly our experience. My wife watches Coronation Street and that’s about the only ITV programme in our planner these days. A large proportion of our viewing is time-shifted on the “tyrannical” Sky channels but the rest is divided between the BBC channels and C4. Among the usual whining about the BBC, it still produces some of the finest broadcasting in the world, you only have to go back to look at their Olympic coverage to see that. The BBC isn’t perfect, what large corporation is.
Oh and if you are still sitting through adverts while watching Sky channels then you’re doing it wrong and need to ask someone how to use the On-demand service or the pause function 🙂
Definitely a personal view since I cannot remember the last time I watched anything on ITV; possibly the odd nostalgia prog on ITV3 (or whatever its called) but there has been nothing for several years that has made me feel the need to watch or record it. Actually, Channel 4 has gone downhill too.
That’s certainly our experience. My wife watches Coronation Street and that’s about the only ITV programme in our planner these days. A large proportion of our viewing is time-shifted on the “tyrannical” Sky channels but the rest is divided between the BBC channels and C4. Among the usual whining about the BBC, it still produces some of the finest broadcasting in the world, you only have to go back to look at their Olympic coverage to see that. The BBC isn’t perfect, what large corporation is.
Oh and if you are still sitting through adverts while watching Sky channels then you’re doing it wrong and need to ask someone how to use the On-demand service or the pause function 🙂
Df is defending the bbc hard so that proves they are left wing ; )
Edit …also i see Ed Millipede is doing ok on the expenses ; )
Rather blindly following one dogma or another, I think it’s more important to try get at the facts in any debate. Something others might do well to try sometime. Interesting that none of the points I’ve made have been challenged or discussed.
There was me thinking that it was a discussion forum as well.
Once again, my work here is done…….
Df is defending the bbc hard so that proves they are left wing ; )
Edit …also i see Ed Millipede is doing ok on the expenses ; )
Rather blindly following one dogma or another, I think it’s more important to try get at the facts in any debate. Something others might do well to try sometime. Interesting that none of the points I’ve made have been challenged or discussed.
There was me thinking that it was a discussion forum as well.
Once again, my work here is done…….
The “Damning report” that the OP entitled the thread is actually quite far from the truth. The BBC were commended for controlling the relocation on time and on budget but as I said, the rest of the press and the usual anti-BBC brigade ignored that section and instead concentrated on a handful of excessive payments.
Keeping up with Jones = competitive
The “Damning report” that the OP entitled the thread is actually quite far from the truth. The BBC were commended for controlling the relocation on time and on budget but as I said, the rest of the press and the usual anti-BBC brigade ignored that section and instead concentrated on a handful of excessive payments.
Keeping up with Jones = competitive
Meanwhile, away from the hysteria,
From the Guardian in May 2013.
The majority of Salford relocation packages – 458 out of 854 in total – were £10,000 or less. However, 188 BBC staff received £50,000 or more and 11 between £100,000 and £150,000.
Another quote from the same article which, no doubt, will be ignored.
Overall, the NAO said that the corporation had done a good job in controlling the cost of establishing its new BBC North broadcasting and production base in Salford
Meanwhile, away from the hysteria,
From the Guardian in May 2013.
The majority of Salford relocation packages – 458 out of 854 in total – were £10,000 or less. However, 188 BBC staff received £50,000 or more and 11 between £100,000 and £150,000.
Another quote from the same article which, no doubt, will be ignored.
Overall, the NAO said that the corporation had done a good job in controlling the cost of establishing its new BBC North broadcasting and production base in Salford
I am not anti BBC or any other corporation, I was just pointing out that you offer redundancy or the option to move.
I am sure in a few years time there will be frontpage headlines similar to the MPs expenses row. Just remember it all comes back to us the paying public for any of these events.
That’s what I said. The BBC will probably have offered redundancy for those that don’t want to move or a relocation package for those that do. Is that a problem? If the company want you to move then the company should pay for it.
I am not anti BBC or any other corporation, I was just pointing out that you offer redundancy or the option to move.
I am sure in a few years time there will be frontpage headlines similar to the MPs expenses row. Just remember it all comes back to us the paying public for any of these events.
That’s what I said. The BBC will probably have offered redundancy for those that don’t want to move or a relocation package for those that do. Is that a problem? If the company want you to move then the company should pay for it.
it should of been redundancies but if you wish to move fine, god almighty what is it coming to. In my day if you could not get to the workplace then you did not get the work.
in the 80s if I worked away from home my allowance was £12.00 and told because I am working away I will be working longer so earning more ! I refused and got a job close to home.
so in fact the reason to go to Manchester to save money has cost money.BBC or not it does seem a bit extravagant
If the company you work for relocates your work then that company has to pay for you to move. Either that or it offers you redundancy. Most companies will try and retain as many of its workers as possible as it saves on retraining and disruption to productivity.
On a relocation, all of the removal costs, estate agents fees, solicitors fees etc, are normally paid by the company. And rightly so.
Was the move worth it? It is too soon to tell. Ask in another 5 years.
I appreciate that this may go against the normal anti-BBC rants we normally see but there you have it.